Are you critical or negative about the United States of America? - Page 11 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Are you negative or critical of the United States of America?

Yes, I am negative or critical of the United States of America
22
65%
No, I am not negative or critical of the United States of America
4
12%
I am neither negative nor positive about the United States of America
8
24%
#15192030
Pants-of-dog wrote:Let me know when you flesh it out into a refutation of my point. Thanks!

Your point I responded to was that it's due to sexism mostly that it's almost always the woman that stays home (to do daycare for the offspring), whereas I argued that it's rather due to biology, as it's also typical of most mammals. Would you argue that most mammals are sexist?
#15192031
Beren wrote:Your point I responded to was that it's due to sexism mostly that it's almost always the woman that stays home (to do daycare for the offspring), whereas I argued that it's rather due to biology, as it's also typical of most mammals. Would you argue that most mammals are sexist?

Most mammals don't enslave great swatches of their own species, and then force them into lifestyles where they are forced to neglect their own children.
#15192038
Beren wrote:Your point I responded to was that it's due to sexism mostly that it's almost always the woman that stays home (to do daycare for the offspring), whereas I argued that it's rather due to biology, as it's also typical of most mammals. Would you argue that most mammals are sexist?


I see.

You claim there is a biological justification for the fact that it is the woman who stays at home when there is no subsidised daycare and no paid parental leave. So you agree that it is the woman who stays at home when there is no subsidised daycare and no paid parental leave. You also do not seem to disagree with the idea that there are several factors that make it so that the woman is often the one who stays home. You are simply clarifying that you think that biology is one of the factors that contributes to this phenomenon.

And you also agree that in the USA, there is no subsidised daycare and no paid parental leave. And so you agree that women would then have an unequal position in terms of pay gap that would not show up on certain charts or metrics for countries like the USA.

My point was that the lack of subsidised daycare and lack of paid parental leave then becomes a women’s issue since they are the ones who pay the price.

This is true regardless of whether or not the cause is sexism or biology.
#15192043
Pants-of-dog wrote:My point was that the lack of subsidised daycare and lack of paid parental leave then becomes a women’s issue since they are the ones who pay the price.

This is true regardless of whether or not the cause is sexism or biology.

It's everyone's issue because everyone including men, women, and children pays the price. You just want to make it an exclusively women's issue on the basis of sexism, which is false, wrong, and ineffective. But that's just how you generally operate, I guess.
#15192049
Beren wrote:It's everyone's issue because everyone including men, women, and children pays the price. You just want to make it an exclusively women's issue on the basis of sexism, which is false, wrong, and ineffective. But that's just how you generally operate, I guess.


Sure, you got me.

Since you agree that the USA does not provide either subsidised daycare or paid parental leave, and you also agree that most of the people who stay home because of this are women, then you agree with all my points that are relevant to this thread.
#15192100
Beren wrote:It's everyone's issue because everyone including men, women, and children pays the price. You just want to make it an exclusively women's issue on the basis of sexism, which is false, wrong, and ineffective. But that's just how you generally operate, I guess.

In most nations, women get the responsibilty for child care. In Québec, which is fairly non-sexist, it is women who are overwhelmingly responsible for single-parent offspring. And most countries are the same, or lean even more towards female guardians.

This has nothing to do with feminism. Feminism would be about making sure that these women (who usually get made responsible for offspring) get an equal chance at careers, schooling, and social lives. This means that daycare MUST be heavily subsidized, or... women will not be able to raise their children properly, and will live with the guilt all their lives.

How many single moms do you know? :eh:
#15192151
QatzelOk wrote:Most mammals don't enslave great swatches of their own species, and then force them into lifestyles where they are forced to neglect their own children.



This is the reason why I think you are brilliant. The angle is subversive. Hee hee.

Women are the ones who get pregnant and have to take the major risk with their own bodies to produce or help produce the offspring. Men just plant the seed. The child depends on the mother in its early development.

But if you analyze familial structures over many millennia you need cooperation between big groups and both sexes producing and complementing each other's strengths and tendencies to make a cohesive society capable of replacing their dying and expired numbers.

The problem is that capitalism does put pressure on both mothers and fathers to go out and work when in the past--a father's breadwinner paycheck had been enough to sustain a family. The capitalist found out single mothers and women are the most loyal and reliable and complacent workers due to their lack of equality for wages and they now rely on them to sacrifice their time with their children to make the capitalist machine more growth and more power.

What needs to happen is balance. And pooling all resources so that the women who prefer to work and have no children can get paid like men, the same as women who prefer to stay home and raise children can also get paid like men do and men can also become homemakers if they prefer to.

My husband would love to be a househusband. I am sure many men would if given the opportunity. But they are with the capitalist machine as well and have to work and be breadwinners.

I firmly believe each adult and couple in a family needs to be financially intelligent and independent. If the other partner dies or there is a divorce? You can't rely on the system to be fair. It is just a horrible, exploitation hamster wheel of soulless crap. It doesn't deal with human families thinking of what is best for the family structure. It never has.

I am surprised people are so loyal to a system that destroys family choice on everything. Children and child rearing and work and savings and time and balance. It gives nothing and only takes, yet has so many fanatical asshole advocates in this forum and others. :roll:
#15192484
Tainari88 wrote:I am surprised people are so loyal to a system that destroys family choice on everything. Children and child rearing and work and savings and time and balance. It gives nothing and only takes, yet has so many fanatical asshole advocates in this forum and others. :roll:

Profit-seeking destroys every human capital feature.

*First, forcing people to remain in one place all their lives, so that they can be slaves to carry water or weed farms. What did this do to our natural social order that had evolved for 100,000s of years?

*Next, force men to leave their families every day to work in a coal mine, and get them to act like the slaves of rich obnoxious managers who work them to death. What did this do to families, and to the male role models that children need to grow up? Destroyed them?

Then, humans are moved to car-dependent suburbs, which ruins the community that children need to have a wide variety of adult role models. No more spontaneous contact with multiple adults and other kids.

Later, they are given screens to "relate" to, which destroys their ability to make friends, talk to strangers, and entertain other humans with their thoughts. Their basic ability to communicate is destroyed.

Finally, we are not allowed to leave our homes, be close to other people, or have social gatherings. This will further destroy whatever humanity is left in our societies.

And corporations (greedy elites) were responsible for every loss of human life quality on this list.
#15192504
QatzelOk wrote:Profit-seeking destroys every human capital feature.

*First, forcing people to remain in one place all their lives, so that they can be slaves to carry water or weed farms. What did this do to our natural social order that had evolved for 100,000s of years?

*Next, force men to leave their families every day to work in a coal mine, and get them to act like the slaves of rich obnoxious managers who work them to death. What did this do to families, and to the male role models that children need to grow up? Destroyed them?

Then, humans are moved to car-dependent suburbs, which ruins the community that children need to have a wide variety of adult role models. No more spontaneous contact with multiple adults and other kids.

Later, they are given screens to "relate" to, which destroys their ability to make friends, talk to strangers, and entertain other humans with their thoughts. Their basic ability to communicate is destroyed.

Finally, we are not allowed to leave our homes, be close to other people, or have social gatherings. This will further destroy whatever humanity is left in our societies.

And corporations (greedy elites) were responsible for every loss of human life quality on this list.


What a downer.
We are living the best time for humanity ever. There is plenty to fix but your attitude plain sucks. It is like running next to the fat guy that just lost 200lbs but still needs to lose another 50lbs and constantly screaming at his ear how pathetic and fat he is.
#15192530
XogGyux wrote:What a downer.
We are living the best time for humanity ever. There is plenty to fix but your attitude plain sucks. It is like running next to the fat guy that just lost 200lbs but still needs to lose another 50lbs and constantly screaming at his ear how pathetic and fat he is.


Indeed. These people are doomed to never get what they want or to convince/influence others to see their way. People like Qatz tend to have the exact opposite qualities of that are needed in leaders. Leaders that can inspire and change the world for the better. Leaders that can get people behind a vision/idea. Leaders don't point fingers and blame everything under the sun. They offer solutions. Leaders don't talk about how everyone else sucks, they find a way to find and tap the potential of others. Leaders don't have a defeatist attitude. They inspire others to join them and lead with them.

Qatz has none of this. Hence, he will forever be complaining about shit no one cares to listen to him about. :lol:

Nobody likes to hear about complaints with no solutions or ideas. I do this with my kids when the complain about shit. I always ask them, "do you have a solution? What do you think could fix this?" They might not always have the answer, but fuck, we need to raise people that are thinking about how to solve shit, not be whiney bitches and nothing else.
#15192542
Rancid wrote:Indeed. These people are doomed to never get what they want or to convince/influence others to see their way. People like Qatz tend to have the exact opposite qualities of that are needed in leaders. Leaders that can inspire and change the world for the better. Leaders that can get people behind a vision/idea. Leaders don't point fingers and blame everything under the sun. They offer solutions. Leaders don't talk about how everyone else sucks, they find a way to find and tap the potential of others. Leaders don't have a defeatist attitude. They inspire others to join them and lead with them.

Qatz has none of this. Hence, he will forever be complaining about shit no one cares to listen to him about. :lol:

Nobody likes to hear about complaints with no solutions or ideas. I do this with my kids when the complain about shit. I always ask them, "do you have a solution? What do you think could fix this?" They might not always have the answer, but fuck, we need to raise people that are thinking about how to solve shit, not be whiney bitches and nothing else.


10k years we lived half of us wouldnt live past 10 years of ages and nearly 90% would probably die by 30, a decent amount mauled by some sort of wild beast or gruesome disease. For the last 2k years we have been in constant wars for land, actual real slavery (not hyperbole of someone being paid an unfair wage) not to mention social disenfranchisement of people based on gender, sexual orientation, religion, etc. This guy cannot stop talking about how awful the western societies are... Pathetic.
#15192551
This have gone a little OT since, but payed daycare, parental leave and so on is just a reform for freedom of choice.

If it was biology that explained housewives, then this would go on. But if it was in the nature of woman to want a sense of autonomy and contribution not just to her family but to society in large, which it seems to be, most women wouldnt want to be housewives.

So can we at least stop talking about biology as an explanation?

In addition to this, its probably beneficial for the economy, as it increase the potential labour force.
#15192561
boomerintown wrote:This have gone a little OT since, but payed daycare, parental leave and so on is just a reform for freedom of choice.

If it was biology that explained housewives, then this would go on. But if it was in the nature of woman to want a sense of autonomy and contribution not just to her family but to society in large, which it seems to be, most women wouldnt want to be housewives.

So can we at least stop talking about biology as an explanation?

In addition to this, its probably beneficial for the economy, as it increase the potential labour force.


Even if we were to grant the premise that there is something in human biology that would justify a behavior of given gender vs another. Even if we were to grant that, that wouldn't be an excuse to institutionalize discrimination.
#15192639
XogGyux wrote:Even if we were to grant the premise that there is something in human biology that would justify a behavior of given gender vs another. Even if we were to grant that, that wouldn't be an excuse to institutionalize discrimination.


I dont know if either alternative, if we talk about payed daycare and a long and payed parental leave is technically discriminating. Its just that I think one of them is a lot more progressive simply as a meassure to increase peoples freedom of choice.

But thats mainly semantics and I think we agree either way that it is the right way to go?
#15192644
XogGyux wrote:What a downer.
We are living the best time for humanity ever. There is plenty to fix but your attitude plain sucks.

It is like running next to the fat guy that just lost 200lbs but still needs to lose another 50lbs and constantly screaming at his ear how pathetic and fat he is.

First of all, you are saying that "the best time for humanity" is the time when he is 250 pounds overweight.

For most animals, this would be a near-death moment in their lives, being incredibly obese like this.

You also suggest that "modern man" has just lost 200 pounds. But when did this happen exactly? In techno terms, mankind hasn't stopped "gaining weight" (losing touch with his nature) since the invention of long spears. That's when women lost their primary role in forming communities - bloodied men killed all the big game, and then started genociding.

You (and others) are saying that our present bloated, obese state is "ideal." I disagree strongly.
#15192651
QatzelOk wrote:First of all, you are saying that "the best time for humanity" is the time when he is 250 pounds overweight.

For most animals, this would be a near-death moment in their lives, being incredibly obese like this.

You also suggest that "modern man" has just lost 200 pounds. But when did this happen exactly? In techno terms, mankind hasn't stopped "gaining weight" (losing touch with his nature) since the invention of long spears. That's when women lost their primary role in forming communities - bloodied men killed all the big game, and then started genociding.

You (and others) are saying that our present bloated, obese state is "ideal." I disagree strongly.


As it is customary, I will provide you with the rope that you will use around your neck. Remember, you always have the choice to be reasonable and not use it by admitting you are wrong, but past experience tells me you won't use that option.

Tell me, if we had a time machine that can put you in any time and country/place in the world in the past, and would also alter your appearance/language so you can live amongst the people that you chose, all knowledge of the present would be innacecible to you, which period/place in history would you want to go?
#15192662
Beren wrote:I wonder if Qatz means to ever lead anything else than the opposition. :lol:

This may be a wise course of action on my part, since all current civilizational governance leads to war, genocide, and ecological ruin.

And it's all backed up by lies.
  • 1
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 19
"Whether we like it or not"

1] TtP, OK the water condenses out at high altitu[…]

Did You Get Vaccinated?

@XogGyux People pay for the foolish stupidity o[…]

The wet bulb temperature is almost always much lo[…]

You're as smart as a goat, @QatzelOk . How is th[…]